Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

1984, just a little later

 Whatever you or the law may think of the Intervention Orders, Apprehended Violence or Domestic Violence Orders, they were only step.
I wrote an an opinion of the legal ramifications on my blog in the article, A View.
Today, we have the Patriot Act in the United States. These laws are an insult to every good idea that America has ever stood for. These laws exist because leaders allowed fear to guide their choices. Reactionary thinking has been the root of so many ugly, unnecessarily violent acts down through history.
In Australia, there are similar laws.

The difference is that the United States has the Constitution, one of the most wonderful documents ever conceived by the mind and hand of man. The Patriot Acts in the US, and similar laws in the UK, have been struck down and limited in time and scope. The President of the United States must go before Congress every 3 months to show that what remains of the Patriot Act - some laws have been declared unconstitutional already - remain necessary. He must show that martial law is required, because that is what the Patriot Act means - martial law.
I have to admit that as an American, these laws sadden me. The thought of them makes me angry and bitterly disappointed in the leadership of my country. These laws make me ashamed.
I can take some pride in knowing that the Constitution and its principles are still defended by the majority of American citizens and their representatives. In balance, it is not enough. No matter what the danger or cost, - even in lives, perhaps even my own - I would prefer to have never seen anything like the Patriot Act in my country.

The similar laws in Australia literally sicken and terrify me.
Because in Australia there is no guarantee of any civil or human right, the danger is doubly present. Such character and ethics has already proven far beyond the leaders of this day. Australia is not bound within its borders to any UN Declaration or Treaty. It must make the current leadership chuckle to see commentators constantly citing the US Constitution or some treaty, knowing that they are not in any way bound by these concepts.

The 'Anti-Terrorism Laws' in Australia are too easily abused by unscrupulous member of the police and government. By the time an average citizen can defend themselves, they would be crippled - financially, physically and emotionally - and the damage done would never be healed. There is very little to stop this sort of corruption and debasement.
I witnessed the institutional prejudice engendered by Intervention Orders. Those orders, as they are presently administered, are equally a step back into a time before the 9th century. (Yes, the 9th century; not 19th.)
In my opinion, these orders are the legal root. and best representation in law, of the damage that has been done to fathers and the family in Australia. These orders represent the concept that "Family law is different." in the worst possible way.

The philosophy which drives such "difference" is represented in the brutish hypocrisy of the representatives chosen by the proponents of White Ribbon Day in Australia; the same group of social engineers which attended the conference in Melbourne in 2004, where the idea of ethnic cleansing towards men was discussed openly at the government expense.
Sadly, such inhuman and arrogant ideas are the consequence of abandoning habeus corpus and the presumption of innocence, as illustrated in professionally presentations.

If AVOs or Invention Orders are to remain a part of the legal structure, then there must be drastic changes in the training of all government and semi-government employees about the nature of these orders. I have enough faith in past members of Australian society to believe that they were never intended to destroy lives based merely on coached allegations. Frankly, I am still astounded that the officers of the courts have not found the ethical courage to do away with them.
These are drastic, emergency measures and they should be used rarely in only emergency situations. For anyone who calls himself a part of the legal profession to think otherwise is … grounds for disbarment, at least. That person has no respect for the law and its principles.

I hope that the members of this site and forums will realize and understand what I am saying. And more, that all members will find the courage to change these laws along with the perverse "Anti-Terrorism Laws."
From my discussions with Australians and Americans over the last year or so, none trust the government, police or other officials with such power. If nothing else, the results from Intervention Orders and Family Law present clear and present evidence for that distrust - expressed in the statistics and results.

Family Law cannot be that different, simply. If there is no crime, then no one deserves to lose their property, civil rights, or human rights. A law which creates a crime from fantasies is itself a crime.

I welcome any comments.

PaulD
 

Last edit: by Amoranthus

1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets